Racism, sexism, and classism: The uneven terrain of student belonging in introductory biology classrooms.

Retention and performance in introductory biology classes is a challenge for many institutions, particularly at two-year schools. Active learning, practice, peer lead workshops and structure have all been shown to increase performance in these classes. A meta-analysis by Freeman et al. (2014) showed that science courses that incorporate active learning increase exam scores and the chance of passing the course. Arbruster et al. (2009) showed an increase in exam scores and student engagement in introductory biology courses specifically. Retrieval and practice have also been shown to increase learning (Karpicke and Blunt 2011, Freeman et al. 2007). In 2009, Ralph Preszler demonstrated that peer lead workshops increase student learning and engagement in introductory biology courses.In teaching past courses I used lecture combined with questioning of the entire class, sometimes with clickers sometimes using the traditional raised hand method, and case studies; however, students did not come to class prepared, leading to repetition of the basic material in the text during lecture and leaving little time for active learning exercises. This lead to a major reorganization of all my classes in the summer of 2013. The reorganized classes included Bio 101, a first semester biology course for nonmajors ranging from pre-nursing to business to art majors. Bio 101 covers basic chemistry, the cell, energy transfer, genetics, and evolution, and has a high drop rate, similar to other institutions. A modified Team Based Learning (TBL) format, with built-in increased active learning, recall, structure and peer lead work, was expected to give an increase in retention and exam scores in introductory biology courses. The modified team-learning method used combined TBL, as outlined in Michaelson et al. (2003), with various lecture lengths and application types. Teams were formed at the beginning of the semester and remained for the entire semester. Readiness assessment tests (RATs) were based on readings and other supplementary material provided on Blackboard. RATs were taken first individually (iRAT) then as a team (tRAT). RATs were evaluated for areas of confusion and followed by lecture on these topics. After lecture, various types of applications were implemented including case studies, problem sets, or discussion/acting. Four tests were given during each semester.Retention and average exam scores in introductory biology courses taught by the same instructor were compared between the 2012 and 2013 academic years. In 2012, lecture combined with moderate use of case studies and other types of active learning (clickers) were used. Two sections of Bio 101 were taught in the fall of 2012 and three sections in the spring of 2013, for a total of 170 students. The modified TBL approach was implemented in 2013 as described above. One section was taught in each semester of the 2013 academic year for a total of 42 students. Implementing the modified TBL format lead to a 10% decrease in student withdrawals from the course. The average final grade was 0.20 grade points higher after implementation. In addition there was a 14% increase in students passing the course (D or above) and a modest (6%) increase in students earning a C or higher. There was a small, but statistically significant increase in overall average exam scores and for exam one (t-test, p<0.05). However, this was not significant for the other three exams (t-test, p>0.05). These data support work that has been done in other introductory biology classrooms and demonstrate that the above changes in course format can benefit students enrolled in two-year institutions.ASM Curriculum Guideline Concept(s): Advancing STEM education and researchPedagogical Category(ies): Course design, Teaching approaches

The Northwest Bioscience Consortium (NWBC) is an NSF funded RCN‐UBE group working to align introductory biology curricula in the Pacific Northwest with the concepts and competencies of Vision and Change. During the last four years, the NWBC has hosted three workshops providing faculty development opportunities for colleagues across the region focused on classroom inclusivity, designing curricula for majors' introductory biology classes, and designing curricula for non‐majors introductory biology courses. We now report on our fourth winter workshop, entitled “A network approach to vertical transfer and articulation for student success in biology.” Held February 8–9, 2018, this workshop brought together faculty and administrative participants to collaborate on the NWBC model that all students are transfer students, whether they are transitioning from one institution to another or from introductory courses to advanced courses within the same institution. Day one of the workshop addressed issues affecting faculty, advisors, and administrators working with students in introductory biology courses, including state level initiatives mandating course topic coverage. The second day facilitated faculty groups working on common curricular outcomes to help students be successful in introductory biology courses and in vertical transfer to advanced biology courses. Here we present an overview of our workshop accomplishments and future plans for the NWBC and its RCN‐UBE funding.Support or Funding InformationThis work is funded by NSF RCN‐UBE 1248121.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

The use of clickers in the lecture classroom has increased in recent years. Clickers have been widely used to improve teaching effectiveness in various lecture classroom settings. Most introductory biology courses are taught using direct instruction. One of the ways that students may be engaged in the lecture classrooms is by using a clicker. Clickers have been linked to several positive outcomes for students. Although clickers have been used in several prior studies, few studies have explicitly focused on BYOD clickers (smartphones, tablets, laptops). This study examined the influence of gender on students’ perceptions of using BYOD clickers in an introductory biology course at a Midwestern private college. The findings suggest that male students have more positive perceptions about using BYOD clickers than females in the introductory biology lecture. The BYOD clicker can foster active learning in the classroom and improve classroom experiences and perceptions for all students in biology and other STEM courses.

In recent years the need for ecological literacy and problem solving has increased, but there is no evidence that this need is reflected by increased ecology coverage at institutions of higher education (IHE) across the United States. Because introductory biology courses may serve to direct student interest toward particular biological categories such as ecology, time devoted to topics in these categories within introductory biology courses may be crucial for captivating student interest. In a 2009 survey, members of the National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) College and University Sections identified 20 topics they considered essential for inclusion in introductory biology courses. The NABT members, acknowledging the importance of ecological concepts, considered two ecological topics essential. The present study evaluated the actual coverage of ecology and other topic categories compared to recommendations and according to location. For this purpose, lecture and lab syllabi were collected from 26 rural, suburban, and urban IHEs from the Mid-Atlantic region. Course content was divided into eight categories, including ecology, and percentages of total lecture and lab time per category were calculated. This actual coverage was compared to the NABT recommendations. Actual coverage of ecology was not significantly different from coverage recommended by the NABT members, whereas cell/molecular/biochemistry and evolution were lower and genetics, development, and taxonomy were higher than recommended. Course content was also compared by location, with no significant effect of institutional location on ecology coverage. We conclude that although students taking introductory biology courses in Mid-Atlantic IHEs are likely to receive the NABT’s recommended coverage of ecology instruction regardless of institutional location, actual ecology coverage has not increased, regardless of the increased need for ecological literacy.

Points of View (POV) addresses issues faced by many people within the life science education community.Cell Biology Education (CBE

Introductory biology courses offer an opportunity to cultivate student skills and attitudes early in their careers. Research indicates that student‐centered learning enhances interest, concept understanding, and science process skills. However, transitioning large courses with multiple sections away from lecture poses unique challenges. Many large courses occur in stadium‐seating classrooms and are taught by multiple instructors. Faculty, postdoctoral fellows, and graduate teaching assistants at Iowa State University have collaborated within a faculty learning community to design and implement active‐learning techniques for Biology 212, a large introductory course. Activities range from clicker questions to group projects, and vary across sections. To determine the most effective formats, we are comparing student outcomes in three areas; 1) content knowledge, 2) science process skills, and 3) attitudes towards biology. Ongoing assessments include previously validated concept inventories, science process skills tests, and attitudes towards biology surveys, as well as evaluations of current and future course performance. The data from Fall 2012 will give insight into which approaches are effective, straightforward to implement, and feasible within the constraints of a large lecture hall. This research is supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Active learning pedagogies decrease failure rates in undergraduate introductory biology courses, but these practices also cause anxiety for some students. Classroom anxiety can impact student learning and has been associated with decreased student retention in the major, but little is known about how students cope with anxiety caused by active learning practices. In this study, we investigated student coping strategies for various types of active learning (clickers, volunteering to answer a question, cold calling, and group work) that were used in 13 introductory Biology courses at a large public university in 2016–2017. A survey asked students to rate their anxiety regarding the four active learning practices and over half of the students explained the coping strategies they used to manage their active learning anxieties. Coping responses from 880 students were sorted into pre-defined categories of coping strategies: problem solving, information seeking, self-reliance, support seeking, accommodation, helplessness, escape, delegation, and isolation. We found that a different category of coping was dominant for each type of active learning. The dominant coping strategies for anxiety associated with clickers, cold calling, and group work were adaptive coping strategies of information seeking, self-reliance, and support-seeking, respectively. The dominant coping strategy for volunteering to answer a question was escape, which is a maladaptive strategy. This study provides a detailed exploration of student self-reported coping in response to active learning practices and suggests several areas that could be foci for future psychosocial interventions to bolster student regulation of their emotions in response to these new classroom practices.

Nearly two decades ago, over 500 biology educators from across North America contributed to the creation of the Vision and Change for Undergraduate Biology Education: A Call to Action report, with recommendations for the development of a deep understanding of core biological ideas and practices in undergraduate students and the integration of evidence-based practices into biology classrooms. Introductory biology courses provide a conceptual foundation in biology while also developing skills essential to both the transition from high school to university and general scientific literacy. Thus, alignment of introductory biology classrooms to Vision and Change is important for fostering biological and scientific literacy in all students, even those whose only exposure to biology is introductory courses. Following the dissemination of Vision and Change were numerous frameworks, resources, and instruments that support the implementation of these recommendations in undergraduate biology programs. Here, we synthesize the tools, evidence-based practices, and structural transformations that have been used to align introductory biology courses to Vision and Change with the aim of providing both an overview of the current landscape of introductory biology education and a starting point for institutions, who, like us, are evaluating their progress toward alignment with Vision and Change.

A critical goal of introductory science courses is to develop students' understanding of key concepts and principles. Typically, introductory biology courses include two major parts--lecture and laboratory. In tab, students have opportunities to engage firsthand in scientific inquiry. However, students are exposed to the bulk of the subject matter in the lecture setting. Problems with the lecture format are well known. Instructors tend to present large amounts of information, and students tend to transcribe, but not process, what the teachers tell them. In large classes, students are inhibited from asking questions, and it is difficult for the instructor to be attuned to what students actually learn. Even when lectures are well organized, students tend not to be engaged with the subject matter in ways that lead to understanding (McKeachie et al., 1986: Cooper & Robinson, 2000: Gardiner, 1994; Vernier & Dickson, 1967). An increasingly popular way to deal with these kinds of lecture problems is to use 'active strategies to get students more involved in the class (MacGregor, Cooper, Smith & Robinson. 2000). Students report they like the class experience better than straight lecture, and that active learning exercises help them maintain their attention better throughout the class period (Bligh, 2000). Active learning is a step in the right direction, but it does not guarantee that students will understand the subject matter. Students need to be more than active; they need to engage the subject matter in ways that lead to a deeper understanding of it. Research indicates that understanding is more likely to develop when students engage in activities such as analysis, evaluation, interpretation, prediction, and explanation (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999; Coleman, 1998; Coleman, Rivkin & Brown, 1997). In biology, we want students to do the same kind of thinking that scientists do when they try to explain biological phenomena, such as interpreting data, making predictions, and explaining phenomena. These are sense-making activities through which students can develop deeper understanding of the subject matter (Perkins, 1998; Chi, deLeeuw, Chiu & LaVancher, 1994). We have designed problem-solving modules for introductory biology lectures in which students engage in this type of thinking. In a typical module, students are presented with a set of data about a biological phenomenon. They develop an explanation to account for the data, and then get feedback from the instructor about their explanations. In this study we examine the effects of a problem-solving module on student understanding of evolution and phylogenetic trees. In large lecture sections, students were presented with data about several animals and then worked in small groups to produce a phylogenetic tree to explain the data. The instructor collected and visually projected several of the models and analyzed them in front of the class. Instructor feedback focused on helping students develop their understanding of the concepts and revise any misconceptions of the material. This sequence was repeated two more times during the class period as students were presented with additional data. Assessment revealed that these in-class modules resulted in significant improvement in student understanding. Methods Course Background The module was tested during the fall 2003 semester in two different introductory biology courses, one for nonmajors (BIO 103) and one for majors (BIO 105). Both courses are designed for freshmen, have no pre-requisites, and course sections range in size from 40-150 students. These are traditional entry-level biology courses with sections on Ecology, Cells, Genetics, and finally Evolution. We tested the effectiveness of the module by assessing 577 students in six different lecture sections taught by five different instructors. Several of the lectures were videotaped and monitored by external reviewers. …

OF THESIS AM I ABLE TO PREDICT HOW I WILL DO? EXAMINING CALIBRATION IN AN UNDERGRADUATE BIOLOGY COURSE Students who are self-regulated are more likely to succeed academically, whereas students who have deficiencies in their learning have been recognized as having a lack of metacognitive awareness (Valdez, 2013; Zimmerman, 2002). If students are metacognitively unaware in large introductory courses, they may have difficulty knowing when to self-regulate and modify their learning (Lin & Zabrucky, 1998; Stone, 2000). One manner in which researchers have assessed students’ metacognitive awareness is by asking students to estimate how they think they will do on tasks compared to their actual performance, known as calibration. The purpose of this study was to examine students’ calibration and study habits. Participants were undergraduates (N = 384) in an introductory biology course at a southeastern U.S. university. Students completed four surveys that assessed their exam score expectations and the study habits they used prior to each exam. Results showed that students’ estimates are most discrepant from their actual performance early in the semester and become more accurate at the end of the semester. A closer look at students’ study habits revealed that the inaccuracy of students’ exam judgments showed little connection to the study strategies that students used. Findings from this study are important for biology instructors.

Incorporation of active learning into large lecture classes is gaining popularity as a pedagogical method due to its known benefits in helping learning outcomes. A more recent active learning technique that has emerged is the flipped classroom. In this study, we investigated the effects of incorporating a ‘partial-flip’ into an introductory general biology course, where only a portion of the class time was spent in a flipped classroom format. This partial flip presented the classic biology experiment of Meselson and Stahl that discovered the mechanism of DNA replication. Performance on in-class formative assessments and subsequent summative assessments (eg out-of-class assignments and exams relating to this material) was compared between a class that had the partial flip and a control class that had a traditional lecture. The partial flip students scored higher on in-class formative questions, specific exam questions and final exam essay questions. We found that the partial flip had different effects in males versus females depending on the assessment. The partial flip manipulation appeared equally effective in aiding both below and above average students in formative assessments. Overall, this study shows that the partial flip classroom can be an effective technique to incorporate into existing courses and that it does provide some benefits compared to traditional lecture.

Post-secondary students often have difficulty with self-regulated learning, particularly in terms of monitoring and accurately assessing their level of understanding and how that is translated into appropriate preparation for their rigorous college/university coursework. With the persistence of academic outcome gaps between marginalized and non-marginalized students in gateway STEM courses and concomitant differences in retention and graduation rates, it is important to understand how self-regulation of learning is developed in students in general, and among different student identities. Interventions and teaching practices need to be cognizant of the unique academic experience of students from different identities if they are to narrow nagging academic outcome gaps. In this dissertation, I investigate how aspects of self-regulated learning change for first-year students over the semester in an introductory biology course. I also explore how providing reflective opportunities for students to develop their metacognition independently, and their ability to make judgments about themselves as a learner, differ among student identity groups and these opportunities can improve academic performance. Several subscales of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) were used to determine levels of self-regulated learning at the start and end of first-year students’ introductory biology course. MANOVAs were conducted on survey scores from the start of the semester and again on changes between the start and end of the semester. Lower usage of higher cognitive and metacognitive strategies was detected for first-generation students of color at the beginning of the semester. Over the semester, decreases in task value for first-generation students were detected. Large decreases were also observed in self-efficacy and metacognitive strategy use for students of color who performed poorly on the first exam. The surveys demonstrated that different student identities develop self-regulated learning differently over the course of a semester. An intervention was designed to address student development of self-regulated learning, specifically metacognition. The Ace Your Course Challenge (AYCC) was a multi-week reflective survey intervention that followed a workshop on metacognition and effective study strategies. Interpretive qualitative analysis was performed on student responses and their experiences were compared between different student identities. Patterns of behavior were also analyzed. Finally, quantitative analyses were conducted to determine what impacts the AYCC had on academic performance measures. Self-reported improvements in learning included an improvement in confidence and preparedness for classes and exams, and better understanding and retention of course content. Students who described an increase in their confidence during the first week were two times

While emphasis is often placed on assessing students' conceptual knowledge, less has been placed on investigating affective aspects of student biology learning. In this paper, we explore self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and science identity, as well as emerging assessment tools to monitor these dimensions of students' learning.

Phylogenetic trees have become increasingly essential across biology disciplines. Consequently, learning about phylogenetic trees has become an important component of biology education and an area of interest for biology education research. Construction tasks, in which students generate phylogenetic trees from some type of data, are often used for instruction. However, the impact of these exercises on student learning is uncertain, in part due to our fragmented knowledge of what students construct during the tasks. The goal of this project was to develop a more robust method for describing student-generated phylogenetic trees, which will support future investigations that attempt to link construction tasks with student learning. Through iterative examination of data from an introductory biology course, we developed a method for describing student-generated phylogenetic trees in terms of style, conventionality, and accuracy. Students used the diagonal style more often than the bracket style for construction tasks. The majority of phylogenetic trees were constructed conventionally, and variable orientation of branches was the most common unconventional feature. In addition, the majority of phylogenetic trees were generated correctly (no errors) or adequately (minor errors only) in terms of accuracy. Suggesting extant taxa are descended from other extant taxa was the most common major error, while empty branches and extra nodes were very common minor errors. The method we developed to describe student-constructed phylogenetic trees uncovered several trends that warrant further investigation. For example, while diagonal and bracket phylogenetic trees contain equivalent information, student preference for using the diagonal style could impact comprehension. In addition, despite a lack of explicit instruction, students generated phylogenetic trees that were largely conventional and accurate. Surprisingly, accuracy and conventionality were also dependent on each other. Our method for describing phylogenetic trees constructed by students is based on data from one introductory biology course at one institution, and the results are likely limited. We encourage researchers to use our method as a baseline for developing a more generalizable tool, which will support future investigations that attempt to link construction tasks with student learning.

Students enter college exceedingly confident that they will earn high grades and engage themselves fully in their courses (e.g., attend all of their classes and help-sessions, submit extra-credit work). However, students' grades and academic behaviors often do not match their expectations (Jensen & Moore, 2008; Moore, 2006b; Moore & Jensen, 2007a). This is especially true in introductory science courses, where grades and academic engagement are often low, even in courses taught by award-winning instructors (Congas et al., 1997; Friedman et al., 2001). Students' poor academic behaviors (e.g., skipping class, ignoring opportunities to improve their grades) often bewilder instructors, who understand that academic success depends largely on students' levels of academic engagement. In this study, we tried to understand what underlies students' academic behaviors and overconfidence. To do this, we analyzed the grades, academic behaviors, and academic predictions of students who earned differing final grades in a large introductory biology course. We asked three sets of questions, the first of which involved grades earned by students on exams throughout the course. How, on average, do students' grades fluctuate throughout the semester? Do students predict high grades late into the semester because their grades are high until late into the semester? The second set of questions involved students' beliefs about the academic behaviors that are important for success, such as class attendance, submission of extra-credit assignments, and attendance at help-sessions (Moore, 2006b; Moore & Jensen, 2007b). Students know that these behaviors are important for their academic success (Jensen & Moore, in press; Moore, 2003, 2006a). However, do students who earn different final grades actually exhibit different academic behaviors? Finally, we wondered how students' scores on exams throughout the semester affect students' confidence about their final grades. How accurately do students predict their grades throughout the semester? That is, how is students' confidence about their final grades affected by feedback (i.e., their grades on exams) that they receive during the semester? Methods Site of the Study & Its Students This study included 278 students enrolled in an introductory mixed-majors biology course at the University of Minnesota. The course covered topics typical of an introductory biology course, including evolution, cellular structure and function, molecular biology, genetics, and ecology. The population was 51% male and 49% female, averaged a 19.8 on the ACT, had a mean age of 19 years, and on average ranked in the 57th percentile of their high school classes. All students were taught in the same classroom by the same instructor who used identical syllabi, textbooks, grading rubrics, and pedagogical approaches. Grade Groups, Grade Cut-Offs & Determinations of Final Grades Students were grouped according to their final grades in the course, which were determined as follows: A= 90% and above, B= 80-89%, C= 70-79%, D= 60-69%, F= 59% and below. Course grades were calculated by averaging two equal scores: the exam score and the lab/homework score. The exam score (50%) included each of the three equally-weighted midterm exams (10% each) and a cumulative final exam (20%). The lab/homework score (50%) included the grade earned in the laboratory portion of the course (30%) and the homework component of the grade (20%), which was based on the completion of 15 assignments (some of which were done in class) throughout the semester. Class attendance was recorded every day with the submission of short, in-class writing assignments. Help Sessions An optional help-session was offered before each exam. These sessions were administered by a teaching assistant who had no knowledge of, or input to, the upcoming exams (i.e., students who attended the help-sessions got no inside information about that exam). …